/lit/ - Literature

>>17522086
Lulz you think you're conscious. We're the one consciousness, you're just the non-entity faggot on 4chan not in on it.

>>17522239
>>>/x/

>>17522086
There's no such thing as consciousness

>Advaita
holy cringe....

>guenonfag playing make believe again after losing the debate in the previous thread

>>17522282
obsessed

>>17522086
Buddhism is sexier than Hinduism though. Being a Hindu never got anyone laid

>>17522086
ohm

>>17522086
Is all the shitting in the street merely a manifestation of the antipathy towards the material?

>>17522293
When I think of Buddhism I think of underage skinny-fat stoners

>>17522289
Yea, gueunonfag is quite obsessed with Buddhism isn't he. Literally living rent free in his mind.

>>17522319
When I think of Buddhism I think of people like picrel

Nagarjuna-senpai... may I borrow your homework?

>>17522319
Underage skinny fat stoners get tons of puss

>>17522339
no i dont

>>17522366
I’m not reporting you because you’re underage, I’m reporting you for being a Buddhist.

>>17522086
Namaste my Advaitin brother. Have you decided to move to an Ashram in India like I have? It's great out here, if you don't mind the stench of faeces and the sight of decaying corpses.

I have met many wonderful Acharyas and have donated most of my savings to them. I serve them wholeheartedly, bowing to their feet and doing their bidding.

One day I hope to become a Sannyasin like my idol Adi Shankacharyaracharyacharachrya and achieve jivanmukti from this mayic existence.

Namaste, ॐ

>>17522373
Reported for announcing report.

>>17522379
kek

>>17522393
Reported for announcing the report of a report.

>>17522405
Lmao baited I didnt report which means not only did you announce a report twice but you also submitted a false report.
Reported thrice.

>>17522408
I can’t see your post.

>>17522086
Truly the memeing has been funny at times, but at a certain point the hostility should be set aside.

>What does it mean when Advaita says that there is only one consciousness?
That consciousness is non-individual because individuality presupposes that something exists as enclosed off from everything else, but since consciousness or the Self is infinite, boundless, that is nothing that exists separately as something which the Self can be considered as being individual in relation to.

>The non-dual and resplendent Lord is hidden in all beings. All-pervading, the inmost Self of all creatures, the impeller to actions, abiding in all things, He is the Witness, the Animator and the Absolute, free from gunas.
- Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 6.11

>I understand that consciousness is neither the mind nor some aggregate, but my consciousness seems to only illuminate one mind, as I can only witness my own knowledge and not someone else’s. Any help would be appreciated.
Advaita says that through studying the Sruti texts under the instruction of one's teacher that we learn to distinguish and isolate our underlying sentience or consciousness from the things which seem to cover up and prevent It from revealing Itself naturally to us. This involves for example the separation of the Atman from the 5 sheathes or kośas of the Taittirīya Upaniṣad. We are supposed to distinguish our Ātman from that which is not It, like separating the stalk from the blade of grass surrounding it.

>The Purusha of the size of a thumb, the internal âtman, is always seated in the heart of all living creatures; one should draw him out from one’s own body boldly, as stalk from grass; one should know him as pure and immortal; one should know him as pure and immortal.
Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.3.17.

Once we do this, we find according to Advaita that this consciousness is not individual. Because thoughts, memory, emotions, volition, egoism, sensory-perceptions are not sentience or Awareness, but rather that are illumined by it, they come and go in it, the important point is that they are not actually witnessed by consciousness because consciousness is non-dual and always has It's own content of Itself self-revealing to Itself in a non-dual way that precludes It from being aware of what our intellects seem to be aware of, consciousness in Its immediacy and purity is free of the distinctions of knower, know and means of knowing, and because of ignorance we fail to distinguish this self-revealing consciousness from the false subject-object distinctions of the intellect which are superimposed upon it, almost like confusing the reflection of our face in the mirror with ourselves (10 men cross a river, in counting the missing, the 10th forgets himself and fears one died until told "you are the 10th man").

>>17522559

Once sentience is distinguished from the non-sentience, It's reveals Itself as formless, homogenous, without partitions, transparent and immediately self-revealing knowing. Once isolated from its contents, which are just the subject-object distinctions of the intellect falsely superimposed upon it, like a cloth seeming to impart a color to a crystal ball, there are no distinguishing features remaining which can be used as proof of its difference from the sentience or soul of others. Every distinguishing feature is really a non-sentient thing observed by your sentience which you are describing.

>Turīya is not that which is conscious of the internal (subjective) world, nor that which is conscious of the external (objective) world, nor that which is conscious of both, nor that which is a mass all sentiency, nor that which is simple consciousness, nor that which is insentient. (It is) unseen (by any sense organ), not related to anything, incomprehensible (by the mind), uninferable, unthinkable, indescribable, essentially of the nature of Consciousness constituting the Self alone, negation of all phenomena, the Peaceful, all Bliss and the Non-dual. This is what is known as the fourth (Turīya). This is the Ātman and it has to be realised.
Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad 7
>That which has no parts (soundless), incomprehensible (with the aid of the senses), the cessation of all phenomena, all bliss and non-dual Aum, is the fourth and verily the same as the Ātman. He who knows this merges his self in the Self.
Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad 12

The practice of reading through most of Shankara's works is pretty essential to understanding the intricacies of how the mind and consciousness work in Advaita. I would encourage you to try reading through a large chunk of his Upanishad commentaries if you have not already and seeing if that makes it more clear, as themes like this come up in most of them and are dealt with at length, and he explains it better than any random person on an imageboard can.

https://estudantedavedanta.net/Eight-Upanisads-Vol-1.pdf
https://estudantedavedanta.net/Eight-Upanisads-vol2.pdf

>>17522566
Thanks bro, I knew there was an Advaitin that could answer my question with such profundity. We may end the thread at this point.

>>17522598
You aren’t me, but I agree. I’m still a little confused about the subject/object distinction, though. I know how to distinguish everything that is not consciousness from consciousness, but I’m having trouble bringing it to the point where everything becomes consciousness. Is maya also consciousness?

jesus fucking christ this fucking guy... non-stop for years

>>17522239
based and Atman-pilled

>>17522729
BUDDHIST BLOOD BUDDHIST BLOOD BUDDHIST BLOOD BUDDHIST BLOOD BUDDHIST BLOOD BUDDHIST BLOOD BUDDHIST BLOOD BUDDHIST BLOOD BUDDHIST BLOOD BUDDHIST BLOOD

>>17522749
Guenon actually fumbled it with Buddhism as pointed out by Evola.

>>17522759
That is why Evola would belong to the warrior caste and not the priest caste like Guenon.

>>17522086
this level of copium ahahhahahaha

>>17522268
Did you think of that yourself?

>>17522759
Evola and Guenon are both opposites in a sense. Opposite perspectives but many similarities in general. I don't think either one would be willing to admit that they "fumbled" with Buddhism.

>>17522784
no

>>17522798
Based retard.

Why did Vishnu appear as an Avatar (Buddha) only to give incorrect teachings? Was it sort of a reverse Bhagavad Gita situation where he was just 'aving a laff?

>>17522086
>Advaita is superior
>but why can’t it resolve the problem of my Jiva being distinct from other Jivas?
This is why you take the Vishishadvaita pill, none of this cryptobuddhism nonsense.

Advaita Vedanta
>What a wonderful phrase!
Advaita Vedanta
>Ain't no passin' craze!
>It means no worries
>For the rest of your days!
>It's our problem-free
>Phil-o-so-phyyyy
Advaita Vedanta

>>17522829
based

>>17522680
>but I’m having trouble bringing it to the point where everything becomes consciousness.
Explained in Shankara's commentary on the Mandukya Karika of Gaudapada in the part 2 of the linked pdf of Upanishad commentaries linked above.
>Is maya also consciousness?
Maya is Brahman's power that Brahman that Brahman possesses. In absolute reality Brahman exists alone while remaining omnipotent without maya existing. There, is Brahman is just existing alone as infinite and non-dual without maya existing in any way that would contradict Brahman being infinite in any manner whatsoever. From this ultimate basis of complete infinity, a lower conventional and empirical experience is lived by the beings subject to ignorance and this is sustained out of Brahman's omnipotence influencing this lower level of reality without this inducing any change in Brahman Himself in or otherwise affecting Brahman in any manner. Once the soul attains liberation this conventional reality is sublated and they experience the absolute reality alone, the body and mind can still read, think, walk around etc because the body and mind and the volition controlling them where never identical with consciousness itself but they were already and always different from it since the beginning and continue on as such. That consciousness was ever deluded or liberated is a false distinction which inheres in the intellect and which doesn't accurately denote what's going on. When the knowledge of the Self or consciousness is attained by the soul and ignorance is ended that is itself a distinction which inheres in the intellect and when that happens, forever before it happened, during it happening and afterwards there never was or is any actual change in consciousness that occurs.

That's all that I can answer for now though, I'm a busy man these days, and need to sleep, because I have wonderful and exciting events to do soon. Good luck in your studies of the texts I hope you get it man.

Buddhist ITT what would you recommend that shows Buddhism superior to Advita Vedanta?
I've read basic Buddhist stuff but haven't found it as profound as Shankaracharya

>>17522880
>shits on thomism
>gushes over indo-thomism
Idk what Buddhist stuff would change your mind since your meme suggests you are just seeking the edgiest religious views from a racialized pov.

>>17522911
its just a meme, don't think too hard about it

>>17522880
>only chaste because he can’t see or reach his penis
kek
>Buddhist ITT what would you recommend that shows Buddhism superior to Advita Vedanta?
I am not sure. I am a Buddhist, but the wisdom of Advaita Vedanta seems to be all-pervading and irrefutable. I must go now and rethink my metaphysical positions.

>>17522918
Hmmm, well try the Vairocanabhisambodhi sutra maybe.

>>17522929
Thanks. I need anything that will help me cope with the razor-sharp intellect of Shankara.

>>17522818
It was taught to sort of suck the willpower and ability to think critically out of a bunch of vicious demons that needed to be subdued, so Lord Vishnu incarnated out of his omniscience as Mahavira and as Buddha to render them all helpless so they could be slain.This story comes from the Puranas.

>In order to defeat the demons ( daityas ) who had succeeded in obtaining great powers through religious austerities, Visnu came down to earth disguised as an ascetic and began teaching doctrines contrary to the Vedas. First, disguising himself as the founder of the Jaina school, he taught the doctrine of anekāntavāda (perspectivism or “non-one-sidedness”) to the group of demons. Then, moving on to another group, he changed his outfit and, appearing as the Buddha, taught that animal sacrifices are immoral and so forth. By this means, the demons lost all of the powers they had attained, and were summarily massacred by the gods. ... by demonstrating that both Mahāvīra (if that is indeed who is portrayed—he is nameless in the Visnu Purāna ) and the Buddha were incarnations of Visnu. ... it completely discredits the actual content of the doctrines of these two sects, by suggesting that the teachings of Buddhism and Jainism are intentionally false and nonsensical. The dupes are the Buddhists and Jainas, who do not understand that the source of all of the teachings they defend so vehemently is a divine trick.

Does this apply to the entirety of Buddhism as changed by and mixed with so many countries and languages over a long time? Only God knows

>>17522880
Hinduism is the path of merit and doesn't lead to seeing the aggregates as conditioned. If you want entertainment, then buddhism is not for you and you can stick to hinduism.

>>17523040
>>17523040
>>Hinduism is the path of merit
And that's the best case scenario. hindus are pro sacrifices, which made them seethe when jains and buddhists said sacrifices are immoral, so they went into super dimwit autismo mode and said buddha and jains patrons are just avatar of their crappy gods. >>17522942

Hindus being simpletons, they really believed it, even to this day.

>>17522329
I SHALL PERMIT IT.

>>17522239
kek